USB Connector Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 (edited) Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in. Edited September 20, 2014 by USB Connector 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod in Toronto Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 Ah, so we need two systems - BL and AL. Before Likes and After Likes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USB Connector Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I would imagine that's not feasible with the board system or would require tons of work. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in.So there was a time when "likes" were not counted? For example many folks like Babycat with well over 40,000 posts and not near the amount of likes you would think she would have?.There are many others of course.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USB Connector Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 (edited) Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in.So there was a time when "likes" were not counted? For example many folks like Babycat with well over 40,000 posts and not near the amount of likes you would think she would have?.There are many others of course.... About a year ago the forum underwent a software upgrade to a newer board system. Here's what it used to look like: http://web.archive.o...erushforum.com/ Edited September 21, 2014 by USB Connector 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in.So there was a time when "likes" were not counted? For example many folks like Babycat with well over 40,000 posts and not near the amount of likes you would think she would have?.There are many others of course.... About a year ago the forum underwent a software upgrade to a newer board system. Here's what it used to look like: http://web.archive.o...erushforum.com/Thanks and....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
len(songs) Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 So they actually had a whole forum for CA? Did they have an S&A one too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x1yyz Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in.So there was a time when "likes" were not counted? For example many folks like Babycat with well over 40,000 posts and not near the amount of likes you would think she would have?.There are many others of course.... About a year ago the forum underwent a software upgrade to a newer board system. Here's what it used to look like: http://web.archive.o...erushforum.com/ Wow, it's so much nicer now. I must have joined not long after the change because I never saw that before. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x1yyz Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? Heh, I'd be fine with that :D-13: 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in.So there was a time when "likes" were not counted? For example many folks like Babycat with well over 40,000 posts and not near the amount of likes you would think she would have?.There are many others of course.... About a year ago the forum underwent a software upgrade to a newer board system. Here's what it used to look like: http://web.archive.o...erushforum.com/ Wow, it's so much nicer now. I must have joined not long after the change because I never saw that before.Me either..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? Heh, I'd be fine with that :D-13:I bet you would.... :D 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenJennings Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I miss the old forum style. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 (edited) Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in.So there was a time when "likes" were not counted? For example many folks like Babycat with well over 40,000 posts and not near the amount of likes you would think she would have?.There are many others of course.... About a year ago the forum underwent a software upgrade to a newer board system. Here's what it used to look like: http://web.archive.o...erushforum.com/ Wow, it's so much nicer now. I must have joined not long after the change because I never saw that before.Me either..... Me either. Or at least I certainly don't remember that color combo. It's pretty homely. Edited September 21, 2014 by EagleMoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ya_Big_Tree Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I miss the old forum style. Me too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lerxt1990 Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? Heh, I'd be fine with that :D-13:I bet you would.... :D Not me :( 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Analog Grownup Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in.So there was a time when "likes" were not counted? For example many folks like Babycat with well over 40,000 posts and not near the amount of likes you would think she would have?.There are many others of course.... About a year ago the forum underwent a software upgrade to a newer board system. Here's what it used to look like: http://web.archive.o...erushforum.com/ Forget what I have said before about this site's design. Seeing what it looked like before this is like looking at the Sixteenth Chapel :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your_Lion Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 (edited) Since we´re talking math, here´s my theory: I think forum members should be rated as per the ratio of (number of likes / number of posts). Does that make sense to anyone? This number would have absolutely no meaning to anyone who has a sizeable chunk of their posts from before the board update that introduced likes was brought in.So there was a time when "likes" were not counted? For example many folks like Babycat with well over 40,000 posts and not near the amount of likes you would think she would have?.There are many others of course.... About a year ago the forum underwent a software upgrade to a newer board system. Here's what it used to look like: http://web.archive.o...erushforum.com/That brings back some memories.Yep. In the 10 years history of the forum, we've only been able to "Like" posts for the last year or two. Before that, you generally just quoted some one and gave them a " :goodone: " Edited September 21, 2014 by Your_Lion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod in Toronto Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I joined before the change, and in all honesty, I thought likes always existed, I just hadn't written a like-worthy post before my first one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USB Connector Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 So they actually had a whole forum for CA? Did they have an S&A one too? Yes. It was when the albums were still new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USB Connector Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I miss the old forum style. Me too I just miss the old chat. The amount of silly things you could do made it much more entertaining. The old forum style made my eyes hurt without changing the colours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disk98 Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 All you new people are strangers to me Therefore I rate you all, Pi. You are all 3.14 or 22/7I on the other hand rate myself - To infinity and beyond (or cool to the 10th power)I have a good beat and you can dance to me.I have my own emoticon, what do you have? Well, considering 22/7 = 3.1428571428571… and Pi = 3.14159265358979…, I'll take the 22/7. :DWell I didn't realize Albert Einstein was going to come in and mess with my comedy. Would you mind tutoring my 14 year old daughter in her honors course consisting of common core math. She is a bit lostLost? I suppose it is rather easy to get lost in the vast expanse that is our Universe. Then again…I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeddysMullet Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 It was changed almost two years ago, coincidentally during Hurricane Sandy. I was fortunate to be out of the area when the storm hit, and I remember coming back after it was over to a miraculously nearly undamaged house (all we lost was some skirting from our deck) and a new forum design. My whole street did well in that storm. My neighbours four houses over hit the Hurricane Lottery in that even though a huge pine tree next to their house fell over into the street, it missed everything on their property. Their house, their cars, everything. The street was blocked for a few days, but there was access on either side of the tree. I miss the old chat, too, and some of the folks listed on those archived pages who don't post anymore. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lerxt1990 Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I think the emoticons were easier, and one could see what sub forum they posted in most and get the number. Other than that I like the new board better - embedding video huge upgrade. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ya_Big_Tree Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I miss the sounds… I helped come up with the idea for a few of the chat sounds… now they are gone. :( 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenJennings Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 embedding video huge upgrade. When it works. I have yet to see any forum software that has video embedding that works consistently... or logically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now